Virginia Democrats want to ban all forms of martial arts and gun training

Firstly, a militia was and is a private force, not at all a professional military. Secondly, a free state was the vision of the Founders, not the authoritarian state that you seek. There was no need for the Founders to frame it as they did if they just meant it for national defense. Since the beginning of Western civilization, going all the way back to Ancient Greece, there had been a recognition for national defense; the right to bear arms held a lot more meaning than simply being able to arm the individual against a mere criminal - it was meant to arm the individual against the state to prevent the consolidation of power and centralized government overreach…and in the worst case…against tyranny.

But I’ll let the Founders speak for themselves.

Samuel Adams

Among the natural rights of the Colonists are these: First, a right to life; Secondly, to liberty; Thirdly, to property; together with the right to support and defend them in the best manner they can. These are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature.

It does not take a majority to prevail… but rather an irate, tireless minority, keen on setting brushfires of freedom in the minds of men.

The Constitution shall never be construed… to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.

The liberties of our country, the freedom of our civil constitution, are worth defending against all hazards: And it is our duty to defend them against all attacks.

The natural liberty of man is to be free from any superior power on Earth, and not to be under the will or legislative authority of man, but only to have the law of nature for his rule.

The truth is, all might be free if they valued freedom, and defended it as they ought.

It is the greatest absurdity to suppose it in the power of one, or any number of men, at the entering into society, to renounce their essential natural rights, or the means of preserving those rights; when the grand end of civil government, from the very nature of its institution, is for the support, protection, and defense of those very rights; the principal of which, as is before observed, are Life, Liberty, and Property. If men, through fear, fraud, or mistake, should in terms renounce or give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the grand end of society would absolutely vacate such renunciation. The right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of man to alienate this gift and voluntarily become a slave.

George Washington

To be prepared for war is one of the most effectual means of preserving peace.

John Adams

There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.

Yesterday the greatest question was decided which ever was debated in America; and a greater perhaps never was, nor will be, decided among men. A resolution was passed without one dissenting colony, “that these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States.”

The right of a nation to kill a tyrant, in cases of necessity, can no more be doubted, than to hang a robber, or kill a flea. But killing one tyrant only makes way for worse, unless the people have sense, spirit and honesty enough to establish and support a constitution guarded at all points against the tyranny of the one, the few, and the many. Let it be the study, therefore, of lawgivers and philosophers, to enlighten the people’s understandings and improve their morals, by good and general education; to enable them to comprehend the scheme of government, and to know upon what points their liberties depend; to dissipate those vulgar prejudices and popular superstitions that oppose themselves to good government; and to teach them that obedience to the laws is as indispensable in them as in lords and kings.

Thomas Jefferson

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with inherent and inalienable rights; that among these, are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles, and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.

As our enemies have found we can reason like men, so now let us show them we can fight like men also.

Every citizen should be a soldier. This was the case with the Greeks and Romans, and must be that of every free state.

Every generation needs a new revolution.

Every government degenerates when trusted to the rulers of the people alone. The people themselves are its only safe depositories.

For a people who are free, and who mean to remain so, a well-organized and armed militia is their best security.

The spirit of resistance to government is so valuable on certain occasions that I wish it to be always kept alive.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.

The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.

Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty.

No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.

It is our duty still to endeavor to avoid war; but if it shall actually take place, no matter by whom brought on, we must defend ourselves. If our house be on fire, without inquiring whether it was fired from within or without, we must try to extinguish it.

I think with the Romans, that the general of today should be a soldier tomorrow if necessary.

I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it.

Patrick Henry

It is vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, peace! But there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear or peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined.

If we wish to be free; if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending; if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms, and to the God of hosts, is all that is left us.

Thomas Paine

These people are either too superstitiously religious, or too cowardly for arms; they either can not or dare not defend ; their property is open to anyone who has the courage to attack them… The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like law, discourage and keep the invader and the plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside. Horrid mischief would ensue were one-half the world deprived of the use of them; for while avarice and ambition have a place in the heart of man, the weak will become a prey to the strong.

George Mason

I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor…My great objection to this government is, that it does not leave us the means of defending our rights or of waging war against tyrants.Where and when did freedom exist when the power of the sword and purse were given up from the people?

1 Like

You seem to not comprehend that the Founders were against a large standing federal army and this Amendment was fashioned with that in mind. It put the burden on the states to establish militias.

The rest of what you quoted simply follows the line of reasoning that the United States of America would have militia’s in each state…and they needed to have a way to defend the union - thus, national defense.

So, what are you trying to say exactly? My point is that since that this responsibility falls to the state, and the states have ensured that they have armed militia for national defense, you have made zero points to counter my argument. The average Joe does not need access to weapons as per the 2nd Amendment.

I just explained to you that a militia was not a professional military, and you proposed that it was for national defense, ergo YOU defend the standing army idea. If the Founders didn’t want a semblance of a standing army, they wouldn’t have been so quick to ratify the Constitution in an illegal manner since the Articles of Confederation prevented them from creating a standing army (which hey, wouldn’t have happened if Alexander Hamilton and George Washington hadn’t conspired against the Articles of Confederation and also wouldn’t have happened if Thomas Jefferson were out of the country when the Constitution was illegally ratified). If you’re actually against the idea of standing armies, you would agree with me.

As for the rest of what I said, that’s incredibly false. You didn’t even bother reading the rest of what I posted.

Finally, your understanding of the 2nd Amendment and the right of citizens to keep and bear arms is entirely incorrect.

1 Like

If you are saying that the Constitution is unconstitutional then why bother arguing about the 2nd Amendment?

1 Like

This answer has evolved over time, a well-regulated militia is not a big standing army if one follows the revolution it was the Minutemen, a state’s militia a kind of National Guard train two weekends a month type of thing. And Supreme Court rulings followed that thinking through the early 1900’s noting it was illegal to carry a sawed-off shotgun because that was not a weapon suitable for defense in a militia. (Miller case circa 1930 something)

Then the rulings began to change still supporting the illegality of a sawed-off shotgun but now embracing more private ownership summed up best IMO by the late Justice Antonin Scalia below (corresponding article as well).


====================================


Justice Antonin Scalia, states: “Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…”. It is “…not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

“Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.”

“We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller (an earlier case) said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time”. We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’ ”

The court even recognizes a long-standing judicial precedent “…to consider… prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons.

1 Like

Ok, but let’s look a bit closer at the problem. I’ll simplify it.

No standing army = A need for a militia to defend the country.

Need for a militia = A need for arms (lots of arms).

A standing army = No need for a militia.

I am not against the idea of a standing army, as we would be speaking another language by now if we didn’t have one.

There’s no way a civilian force could withstand another country’s real army, especially starting at the turn of the 20th Century.

You can try to have the definitive word all you want, but the debate on what the Founders meant or what they would have thought of modern times…will go on forever and I don’t think that was the intent of the OP. We have strayed off course and should focus on the discussion at hand.

You highly underestimate the capability of armed men committed to battle. I have fought in Iraq and Afghanistan. I can tell you that these were not easy fights, despite our technical superiority. I have many buddies who have been either killed or severely wounded from crude homemade IEDs vs our up-armored vehicles. A well armed force with the tactical know how and commitment to fight could devastate well trained formal Army. Never underestimate the capability of the common man, regardless of the time or weaponry. Especially when the enemy can blend in with the non-hostile population. Why do you think these leftist cucks in Virginia want to take guns away so badly?

2 Likes

You guys are having a good discussion, but Virginia dems are doing this to run the NRA out of the commonwealth. That’s it.

1 Like

It will remain law and enforcible until it’s struck down in the courts. Most likely they’ll fight it all the way to the SCOTUS.

Try telling that to the Taliban and NVA.

They have both fought the most powerful modern armies on the planet to a draw and eventually beaten all of them with long running insurgencies that eventually broke the will of the invaders.

With the complete anti gun agenda of the democrats I don’t think “that’s it”. Definitely a big part of this legislation but not all of it.

I fully support this. America is much to violent. We need to start removing toxic masculinity from our society before more people are oppressed and victimized. This is no joke and a serious threat to the country. It’s also time to ban all semi automatic rifles and handguns entirely, and get rid of the Second Amendment once and for all. We need to be more like Australia and Europe.

How do you feel about the proposition that it is inherently a compelling national interest for a nation to be sustained by the posterity of own citizens rather than with replacements from afar for those that have been aborted?

As someone who was born, raised, and still lives in the now Islamic/Marxist occupied sanctuary county territory of Northern Virginistan that put many of these leftists in control in Richmond, those of us that bleed red, white, and blue aren’t going to let these tyrants put their boots on our necks. Things are going to get ugly in January but in my opinion this fight is long overdue. I call on all my fellow Northern Virginia patriots to unite here! We must connect and make a stand!

2 Likes

Where in NOVA are you?

1 Like

I’m in Merrifield now but my family is from the Alexandria/Mt. Vernon area and they all still live there. That’s where our family home is and it’s been in the family since before the Civil War. My family also owns a home in Old Town that is about just as old. You?

1 Like

Not far at all. I’m in West Springfield surrounded by illegals and jihadis.

1 Like

Yeah - I’m surrounded by Muslims too along with the Asian spillover from Annandale. I was living in Arlington for a while but the neighborhood went to shit overnight. It was fine and quiet for years then all of a sudden…illegals everywhere. Then came the check cashing / title loan joints and then the Chicken ala Brasa dumps. I packed up the family and we temporarily moved to Mosaic. I don’t really understand how the illegals flooded Arlington considering how expensive it is to live there.

1 Like

I hit that Farmer’s Market at Mosaic on Sundays. It’s cuckville there but the apartments look nice and the meat at that Farmer’s Market is excellent. BGR is a plus too.

I’ve been looking to move out to Loudoun but that commute would be nuts.

Arlington is turning into the HQ of the far left. The county is run by insufferable shitlibs. Alexandria takes a close second for their levels of cuckoldry but they will never be as shitty as Arlington. Speaking of Alexandria, anything outside of Old Town is going downhill fast. If your fam is there you probably know that though.